Discuss The Archers - yes, this really is Thread 103. Are you going to vote for feet, stations of the cross, or a hologram? Will Natasha ever return? Will Russ ever leave?

[DadDadDad]

Exciting times - this thread will witness our 100,000th post in this long-running unbroken chain of threads.

New and old posters welcome. Don't spoil with any future plotlines.

And if you need a beginners' guide see here: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/radio_addicts/3557323-For-Archers-fans-a-guide-to-acronyms-on-the-long-running-discussion-threads-and-any-other-meta-thread-questions-you-may-have

Carry on...

No, I've never had a life. that comment made me LOL Gabrielle - I was just reading out your comment to DH as an example of the encyclopaedic detail provided by contributors after he accused me of being overinfested. I loved this evening’s episode - Jazzer and Jim are always a winning combination both individually and as a double act.

The Archers is my life.

Oh joy ... Imagine the editorial meeting where all the SWs agreed that they’re rubbish at legal plots. “So why don’t we have a legal story with people who know as little as we do?!”

Anyone notice the stay of execution for Johnny and Hannah at No 1 The Green? What is that going to be about?

BOOP for Bert’s bored pony tale. So lovely.

That is because Joe's final words will be at Grange Farm. Not a spoiler just a guess as that is what he wants. I wonder if Nutasha will come back.

Anyone notice the stay of execution for Johnny and Hannah at No 1 The Green? What is that going to be about?
I assumed that it was an inserted hasty re-write.

Have you already had this conversation - but surely Russ and Elizabeth are on an irrevocable trajectory toward each other? must be inevitable??

Well, he likes them vulnerable. I think it's signposted and she will alienate Frilly.
Maybe the staying at No1 was a tropical insert - they are usually where 2 characters are called in to redo a scene.

Oh goodness! Yes, it sounded like a hasty rewrite - but in my head Joe has already gone. (Sorry Joe!) I’d forgotten they still have to make it happen ‘on stage’.

I noticed that Jim quoted the case name as “x versus y”. I’d have thought that he was educated enough to know that you say “x and y”, eg Donoghue v Stevenson is spoken as “Donoghue and Stevenson”. I know he’s not a lawyer (and indeed that is the point of the storyline) but I had a feeling that having him get that wrong was not deliberate

Maybe it's different in England but up here we say "Donaghue versus Stevenson". "Donaghue and Stevenson" sounds really odd to me- as if they had been on the same side.

Anyone notice the stay of execution for Johnny and Hannah at No 1 The Green? What is that going to be about?

I missed that- was that tonight?

Yes, Clarrie mentioned it to Susan.

In England you’re severely marked down in Bar exams if you say ‘versus’. (At least, that’s what one was told a couple of decades ago ...)

LassofFyvie I have an Oxford law degree.

Sorry, posted too soon. And I have practised litigation for 20 years. There is no “maybe” about it. It is how lawyers refer to cases in England. Where is “up here”- Scotland? If so, Jim is supposed to have spent his professional life in Scotland so perhaps that is where he might have picked up that way of quoting cases.
(And of course Donoghue v Stevenson actually was a Scottish case, the snail in the bottle in Paisley, so maybe it was a bad example!) But it forms the bedrock of English tort law and I can assure you that it is said as “and”, as is every other case ever cited in English law proceedings.

Definitely Donoghue and Stephenson in England. Imagine a snail in your friend's ginger beer bottle getting all the way to the Supreme Court these days

I'd say "Donoghue against Stevenson" (Scots law degree) I agree with LassofFyvie, Donoghue and Stevenson makes them sound as though they were on the same side. Did you know that there is a statue in Paisley commemorating the case?

Surely Will and Tracey can't get together? When Will was married to Emma, he was Tracey's nephew in law. Wouldn't it be too weird to have a relationship with your ex wife's aunt?

But would you also say “versus” Arpafeelie? I can’t overstate quite how unacceptable that is in an English court, particularly because Americans do say “versus” so anyone using that just sounds like they have watched too much Good Wife and judges absolutely hate it. Something I would have expected Jim to know.
I’ve never been to Paisley, do like their patterns though...
Getting back to the Archers, I wasn’t at all surprised to hear that Clarrie was a mild cheddar type but, as a PP said, it did come across as a bit lower-orders patronising. Glad that Pat has cottoned on to all not being rosy between Tom n Tash. And did I hear that Jolene found bunting “when she was posing for a photo in the phone box” or have I imagined that?

I couldn't work out why, having sussed out what appeared to be very valid problems with Jazzer's potential claim, Jim was prepared to act to put them forward. Unless he's aiming to push Jazzer into a sensible compromise, of course.

Interesting, I don’t think I’ve ever heard the Someone v Someone thing out loud before in the context of a non-American case, I’ve only read it.

The irresistible impulse to add self to the no doubt long list of posters with Law degrees from Oxford or Cambridge and careers in litigation* almost made me forget what I came for ...

I’ve found a PhD for Johnny: here.

*Escaped alone ...

Is it about dairy systems or diary systems though, George?

I don't think you can expect Jim to know, when two Scottish lawyers here didn't know. The thing that was absolutely wrong here was to say "vee" instead of "versus" Anybody saying Donoghue vee Stevenson would have been corrected at University. I went into conveyancing, so no experience of court work and I can't remember the last time I had to say a case name out loud. But I read an article two days ago and I definitely wasn't reading it as "and". That just seems counter intuitive to me.

I'm very well educated but not in law & would have said it exactly how Jim did. Because I don't know any better. So I think the Scriptwriters got it right.

Do you know, I also have a high-falutin' law degree from Oxford, and I had completely forgotten about versus / v / and. The country where I live and practise use "against", or rather the translation.
Looks like I know as much about English law as Jazzer and Jim. Maybe I will offer them the famous free half hour.

But you do agree I’m not making it up chatnickname? I wonder if Jim would know his Dickens? It’s written as “Jarndyce and Jarndyce” all the way through Bleak House. I dunno, it jarred with me immediately but it would given my background and no doubt I am missing all sorts of engineering and farming faux pas all the time. I do think of law and Classics as quite closely- related fields, but I suppose it is an oral practice point really and English TV court dramas tend to depict dramatic cross-examinations rather than citation of cases, so unless you were hanging out in court a lot or had a bunch of really boring barrister friends, you might not know. And “against” is used in criminal cases.